Ran across this article making it's way around facebook.
I thought it was very interesting, especially considering my wife is an elementary teacher. This really hits the nail on the head.
What are your thoughts?

One of the easiest things to do? Your skewed reality it seems has no bounds as does your apparent ignorance on the subject. Homeschooling your seed gives you a perspective, hardly one that would provide evidence of what is the truth. Hey but the malls are full right?

Except you're the one who is ignorant. It has nothing to do with my reality, that is what a friend of mine who teaches, also in Boston for over 20 years said to me. He taught all his kids to read before starting school.

Furthermore, you assume much. I didn't homeschool my daughter until last two years of high-school. I did, however, bring her to a tutor who taught in the NY school systems, but had a tutoring firm teaching kids to read at age 3 and 4 with them reading by the six week. ( simple books of course but reading). I started her there at age 4. After that, I learned from her partly also studying the remaining phonic's sounds. I continued to teach my kid before she entered K. It's not hard, it's easy. It just takes time and patience. There are many other parents, aka lay people, who have done the same.

From that experience I tutored for No Child Left Behind as a volunteer for a firm who received a grant. I moved all of my kids up half to a full grade in 4 months.

You're the one who is ignorant. You've bought into the idea it's hard. You think only public school teachers or govt experts can do it. They make a hash of it, but it is how they've been trained.

And even with the salary wrong, people continue to talk about teaching one person versus teaching 30. And act as if it's easy to keep structure among a group of 30 screaming kids, many of whom are very poorly behaved. I would imagine that most of the people who insist on how easy the job is would either burn out quickly, or be very bad at it. That includes me.

I thought the schools reduced class size. I know they're not all this large in the early grades everywhere.

Gotcha. Take one of the cities that has the absolute highest cost of living and has the highest wages in the entire US and use it to make a blanket statement.

Also, starting salary for a teacher in Boston is 46K.... not 75k as you claim. In fact... the starting salary for someone with a Doctorate is 59k.

I said for Kindergarten. You link has no pay lister for K. She started at $50 back then. Moved up to $75 by about the mid 80's. She had a Masters. Masters got more because K was considered crucial.That's why she got so much. Anyhow, that's what I was told when my eyeballs popped out at her salary. Your link is 2010. The other pay scale matches what I said. My family's friend made over $60 teaching High School in the 90's.

I never said all teachers make that kind of money either. Not everybody has a high income in that area and the cost of living was not as high when she started.

I don't see any blanket statement. I said an eastern metro city for two people. Can you read? Here is what I posted. It may be a lot for that area but it's still part-time according to that teacher. If another area is cheaper to live in, then the pay would be lower to match. So, even if it was part-time it would cost less to live.

Quote:

I've a friend who is a teacher in a eastern metropolitan city and he says " It's the best paid part-time job ever." He has 8 kids too. I've an in-law who was paid $75 for K in Boston in the mid 80's even.

Except you're the one who is ignorant. It has nothing to do with my reality, that is what a friend of mine who teaches, also in Boston for over 20 years said to me. He taught all his kids to read before starting school.

Furthermore, you assume much. I didn't homeschool my daughter until last two years of high-school. I did, however, bring her to a tutor who taught in the NY school systems, but had a tutoring firm teaching kids to read at age 3 and 4 with them reading by the six week. ( simple books of course but reading). I started her there at age 4. After that, I learned from her partly also studying the remaining phonic's sounds. I continued to teach my kid before she entered K. It's not hard, it's easy. It just takes time and patience. There are many other parents, aka lay people, who have done the same.

From that experience I tutored for No Child Left Behind as a volunteer for a firm who received a grant. I moved all of my kids up half to a full grade in 4 months.

You're the one who is ignorant. You've bought into the idea it's hard. You think only public school teachers or govt experts can do it. They make a hash of it, but it is how they've been trained.

Then apparently your friend lied or at the very least propped up her earnings. The rest is just your usual high horse drivel. There are crappy teachers, the vast majority are extremely hardworking professionals who are continually seeking best practices to improve a highly fluid instructional setting. Tutoring is admirable, but isn't remotely the same has handling the instructional load of a full class load of children with varying abilities across the curriculum. We actually do a pretty decent job at teaching literacy, and I would grant that with most children it can seem easy. Numeracy concepts are sorely lacking and an area where real reform is needed. That said it has nothing to do with the quality of the teachers or their value for they are paid.

I did not mean to degrade your efforts, but your comments are a shallow reflection of reality at best.

Then apparently your friend lied or at the very least propped up her earnings.

That post says nothing about that friend who is a he. It was a relative that was a she. She is not a liar and other relatives knew how much she made.

Quote:

The rest is just your usual high horse drivel.

In your opinion. I've worked plenty of educators and at least one well-known educator, who even was invited to the White House under Reagan and and is an author of books on how to do it. It's one of the easiest things in the world if you have the right system and methods. These folks are critical of how reading is currently taught. They primarily worked as remediators who repaired and turned students around. Although they started as teachers.

Quote:

There are crappy teachers, the vast majority are extremely hardworking professionals who are continually seeking best practices to improve a highly fluid instructional setting.

Actually, the gamut is that there are a few great teachers, a few poor ones and the ones in-between are mediocre. It's the training and the system.

Quote:

Tutoring is admirable, but isn't remotely the same has handling the instructional load of a full class load of children with varying abilities across the curriculum.

Tutoring is teaching. I did in in small groups as well as individual. Most were ESL too.

Quote:

We actually do a pretty decent job at teaching literacy, and I would grant that with most children it can seem easy.

That said it has nothing to do with the quality of the teachers or their value for they are paid.

It has everything to do with how teachers have been trained to teach reading. There's been too many fads, adopted, which dropped tried and proven methods. This is another problem with the education racket. Phonics, systematically, taught is the best way to teach reading. It works and even in a classroom setting. Of course, one-on-one can go faster.

Quote:

I did not mean to degrade your efforts, but your comments are a shallow reflection of reality at best.

Of course, this is just opinion. I go by results...and they are lacking. Keep your head in the sand though. The educators I've worked with say you're wrong and thing the system is a mess.

Here's another thing VA. When I tutored for NCLB, one woman at this place was in her 70s who taught in the 1960's. She said teachers back then didn't even finish their degree program, but worked on it while they taught school. They did not have the problems back then we have now in reading per her. Guess, it takes a Masters to 'f them up these days.

Are you reading that as Grade 1, Grade 2 and 1st grade and 2nd grade? As in that is what they earn for being in that particular grade???

Holy shit.

Grade 1 is a Bachelors degree.

Grade 2 is a Bachelors degree +15 credit hours.

Grade 3 is a Masters... and so on.

A teacher will be paid the same whether they teach K or 4th grade.

That's not what I said though. I was saying, that the reason she was paid higher, was because K was considered a critical age affecting the child for later. That was the reason I was given. Hence, the higher pay for K.

That's not what I said though. I was saying, that the reason she was paid higher, was because K was considered a critical age affecting the child for later. That was the reason I was given. Hence, the higher pay for K.

oh?

Quote:

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

What was ignorant of reality? K teachers getting $75 per year, even to start, because it could wreck kids feelings about education early?

TO START. No. As of the most recent pay scale, someone with a Doctorate would need to reach stage 4 on the pay scale before they would even sniff 70k.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

I have an uncle whose wife taught in Boston school system Kindergarten. That was what she was making back in the mid 1980's.

If they aren't making that much now, they sure as hell weren't getting that back then. Either you are misremembering or they are. There is no way that someone is getting paid that much.

To put a point on it. 75k in 1980 would equal to between 125-150k today. No one is getting paid 120k + to teach kindergarten unless it is some super prestigious private school... and I'm not sure even they would make that much.

As for the math... I took an average from a few inflation calculators on the net. I will admit not perfect science but it gives us a general window.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

The median expected salary for a typical Teacher Kindergarten in the United States is $52,694.